Pool C -- 2011

[Frank Rossi]

The bowl schedule is irrelevant to the regular season scheduling issue. The bowl schedule doesn't affect THIS argument.

The NEFC and ECFC HELPS all of D-3. It HELPS to keep these schools' football programs. It HELPS them recruit male students. It HELPS get male students engaged. It HELPS in growing the D-3 football footprint.

You asked the question of whether we had any evidence that the NEFC and ECFC are avoiding the other East conferences.  You thought it was going to be a rhetorical question.  You're surprised I have some nominal proof that they are.  Stop avoiding the evidence.  Their own scheduling backs up that evidence that they are avoiding better teams, especially when it shouldn't matter who they play. 

Nobody is suggesting the NEFC and ECFC disappear.  They have Pool A bids.  Go win them, Men.  Leave Pool C bids for teams that actually schedule somebody and need some assistance, perhaps because they have a monster in their conference to contend with every year, assuming they have some level of verifiable strength independent of that one asterisk game (loss).

[Frank Rossi]

But again, I can't see presidents and athletics directors of small colleges in New England forming football conferences for the sole purpose of denying SJF or Wheaton a Pool "C" bid!

No, they did it for a Pool A bid.  Over the years, especially in 2008, those teams saw that the system could be gamed, whether or not they intended to do so.  Now, with that evidence, it's apparent that scheduling internally only can help create an artificial resume for a second bid.

[softballrz]

half of the nefc are are state schools, travel cost is a large factor when scheduling is discussed.  the rest can schedule one ooc game, and some have asked.  I can tell you for fact rpi pulled out of the Endicott schedule.   

[smedindy]

I would suggest they formed the conference for the benefits of their football playing student-athletes. Otherwise, they may not have incentive to keep the football program, or in some cases, start one. And that would be bad for D-3.

Travel budgets are a big factor as well. So you can be all high-and-mighty when you are a private school that has resources. But a struggling public, well, you have limits and constraints. (Thanks softballrz.)

[B.W. jacket]

 I totaly agree with Mr Coleman and Bashbrother that you want the BEST Teams in the tournament that actually have a chance to win it, not a tune up team, for Mount or Whitwater, then again I'm biased.

[smedindy]

I totaly agree with Mr Coleman and Bashbrother that you want the BEST Teams in the tournament that actually have a chance to win it, not a tune up team, for Mount or Whitwater, then again I'm biased.

I feel for you. But that pesky loss to Capital hurts the case, just like last year when Wabash lost to Wash U. and sat home with two losses.

But frankly, it seems that any game before the quarter-finals is a 'tune-up' for Mt. Union!

[bashbrother]

Smeds.... agree they shouldn't have lost to Capital....  but we all know they are a better football team.   Lessor teams have winning their conference as their way into the tourney.... SOS has to count for something, or the tourney is diluted in my opinion.

Just as in the NCAA Div I Basketball Tourney,  at-large bids are mostly if not all about quality.  (Well also about money, but that is dynamic that doesn't apply to Div III, other than travel.)

[HScoach]

So what we have learned is the best way to ensure a bid to the NCAA tournament is to dodge all strong competitors by any means necessary. Create a schedule of cupcakes who do not belong on the same field as you, and run the table year after year.

What a wonderful message to send, let alone defend.

I have very little problem with the current playoff selection process.  It's simple.  Win your conference and you're in.  Much better situation now than it was a few decades ago when they arbitrarily selected 4 teams in each region. 

The only issue I have with the NCAA is their selection of the Pool C bids.  I wish they would put more emphasis on the actual strength of the teams and the leagues they play in and not just the team's record.

[Frank Rossi]

So what we have learned is the best way to ensure a bid to the NCAA tournament is to dodge all strong competitors by any means necessary. Create a schedule of cupcakes who do not belong on the same field as you, and run the table year after year.

What a wonderful message to send, let alone defend.

I have very little problem with the current playoff selection process.  It's simple.  Win your conference and you're in.  Much better situation now than it was a few decades ago when they arbitrarily selected 4 teams in each region. 

The only issue I have with the NCAA is their selection of the Pool C bids.  I wish they would put more emphasis on the actual strength of the teams and the leagues they play in and not just the team's record.

Nobody disagrees with Part One, HSCoach.  One problem I keep pointing to, though, is the increase in Pool A bids and what will eventually be a reduction in Pool C bids.  That will necessitate a change at some point, perhaps in the football Pool A minimum to free up some at-large bids.

Regardless of Endicott making the Tournament tonight, I will be asking the Committee Chair on "In the HuddLLe" about objective vs. subjective SOS.  We went down this path last year, and I think it's a very interesting answer from the Chair that you'll hear.  It's not so much the Committee per se, but the edicts the NCAA is trying to maintain across all sports.  The NCAA is trying to avoid the admission that football is a special animal because of the scheduling limitations, statistical limitations and the length of season limitations.  However, they made one step in the right direction, allowing the seeding of undefeated teams to be influenced by those teams' recent playoff histories (since comparing undefeated teams with similar schedule strengths would be tough otherwise, leading to the UWW anomaly at the #2 seed last year).  They need to make the next step to legitimize the Pool C process.

[smedindy]

Perhaps we're at the absolute limit of "A", anyway? We're at 25. Next year it should be 24 with the SCAC going kaput (for all intents and purposes). The SAA will add one, eventually, but we have to see how the SCAC works itself out, perhaps with the UAA.

I think the most we'll have is 26 "A" bids. I can't see the NEFC wanting two bids, otherwise they'd already have them. What I can see is that "B" goes by the wayside because they may have just have a small handful of teams left.

[Frank Rossi]

Programs keep adding football at the D3 level... We'll be in the 245 vicinity soon.  Do the math as conferences begin to even out.  Taking out the NESCAC, 235 divided by 7 = ~34.  We wouldn't have enough Pool A bids, let alone Pool C, if conferences begin to scatter out more.

[DanPadavona]

Thanks to everyone in the debate for staying on topic. I know my position on Pool A is controversial and there are going to be a lot of people who vehemently disagree.

@Smed - We definitely disagree on some important points, but you are a good poster and I appreciate your opinion. Much respect.

[Ralph Turner]

Perhaps we're at the absolute limit of "A", anyway? We're at 25. Next year it should be 24 with the SCAC going kaput (for all intents and purposes). The SAA will add one, eventually, but we have to see how the SCAC works itself out, perhaps with the UAA.

I think the most we'll have is 26 "A" bids. I can't see the NEFC wanting two bids, otherwise they'd already have them. What I can see is that "B" goes by the wayside because they may have just have a small handful of teams left.

We could go to 27 bids with the UAA/SCAC linkage and a new bid for the SAA in 2014.  (Two new schools are adding football in the SAA.)

Pool B should be gone by then.  The independents will be Finlandia, Macalester, Wesley and Huntingdon.

[Pat Coleman]

That's still just a net gain of one, though, Ralph. 25 includes a current SCAC bid. The SAA would make it 26.

[DanPadavona]

The independents will be Finlandia, Macalester, Wesley and Huntingdon.

Simple solution to all our problems then. Wesley isn't too far down the road from Gallaudet, so Wesley joins the ECFC as
an East Region member. Wesley gives the ECFC instant Pool A and Pool C credibility. I write this sarcastically of course, because I don't think the ECFC has any interest in finding out where their founding members rank nationally.